2013 grouped 218931 Nullification, etc. of the contract

National Federation of Korea

A

August 20, 2014

October 8, 2014

1. It is confirmed that the insurance contract described in the attached list No. 1 between the plaintiff and the defendant is null and void.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 26,580,000 won with 5% interest per annum from September 2, 2013 to December 17, 2013, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 24, 2003, the Plaintiff, an insurer, entered into a credit agreement with the Defendant for the credit period from December 24, 2003 to December 24, 203, 203, with the Defendant, the prime insurer, the Defendant, the purchase price of the insurance, KRW 10,000 won under the main contract for cancer diagnosis, KRW 10,000 won under the death agreement, KRW 500,000 under the death agreement, and KRW 47,250 under the monthly payment agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”). According to the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract and the terms and conditions for cancer diagnosis, the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the following insurance benefits.

- 7 Hospitalization Benefits: When the Insured has been hospitalized for more than 4 consecutive days for the direct purpose of the diagnosis as a seven disease after the date of commencing the liability, for which the diagnosis has become final and conclusive;

- The amount of hospitalization for other diseases: when the person has been hospitalized for not less than 4 consecutive days for the direct purpose of the treatment due to diseases other than the seven major diseases.

- The disaster operating benefit or the disaster hospitalization benefit: when the Insured has been hospitalized for more than four consecutive days after the date of commencement of the liability or for more than four consecutive days after he/she had been hospitalized for the direct purpose of the treatment due to a disaster after the date of commencement of the liability

- Cancer diagnosis benefits: by a special agreement, when the beneficiary first becomes final and conclusive after the date of commencement of the liability for cancer security during the period of the deduction;

B. During the period from April 13, 204 to June 30, 2013 as indicated in the attached Table 2 list, the Defendant received hospitalized treatment at 35 times at the 18 Place of 18 Hospital and claimed mutual aid money from the Plaintiff, and paid 7,000 won, 4,000 won, 5,760,000 won, general hospitalization benefits, 8,8660,000 won, 5,660,000 won, and 6,000,000 won, in total, from the Plaintiff.

C. As shown in the separate sheet No. 3, the Defendant: (a) purchased monthly insurance premium of 29,200 won on July 12, 2002; (b) monthly insurance premium of 79,600 won on August 8, 2003; (c) monthly insurance premium of 80,600 won on October 16, 2003; and (d) monthly insurance premium of 105,220 won on December 23, 2003; (b) monthly insurance premium of 47,250 won on December 24, 200, and 205; and (c) received the total insurance premium of 10,706 won on March 7, 2005; and (c) received the insurance premium of 205,000 won on March 25, 2005; and (d) received the insurance premium of 19,570 won on March 29, 2005.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 30 (including a tentative number), this Court

The results of fact inquiry on the National Health Insurance Corporation, ELA damage insurance company, Mana Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Samsung Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., Samsung Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., new life insurance company, and Dong Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., and the purport of all pleadings.

2. The assertion;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) In the first place, the instant insurance contract was concluded for the purpose of unfairly acquiring mutual aid money by pretending to a mutual aid accident or exaggerationing the degree of the accident, rather than against the risk to life, body, etc., and thus, is null and void in violation of good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to return 2.6.8 million won, which the Plaintiff received, to the

(2) Preliminaryly, in light of the Defendant’s condition and degree of injury and the Defendant’s injury, the Defendant intentionally committed long-term hospitalization in order to receive hospitalization fees and daily allowances from the insurance purchased by the Defendant, even though there is no need for long-term hospitalization. Thus, this constitutes a case where the Plaintiff was not liable to pay insurance money due to intentional exemption under Article 659 of the Commercial Act or lack of proximate causal relation between the disease and the hospital treatment, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 26.

B. Defendant’s assertion

With respect to the primary claim, the insurance contract of this case cannot be deemed null and void solely on the ground that the insurance contract of this case was not concluded and the hospitalization was frequent for the purpose of illegally receiving the mutual-aid money. As to the conjunctive claim, the Defendant did not cause any intentional accident, and the Defendant was hospitalized according to the doctor’s diagnosis and received appropriate medical treatment, it does not constitute a ground of Article 659 of the Commercial Act.

3. Judgment on the main claim

(4) In light of the above facts, it is difficult for the Defendant to enter into an insurance contract for a long period of up to 20 years on July 12, 2002 to 205, 3, and 25, and it is difficult to view that there are special reasons to enter into multiple insurance contracts the content and nature of which are similar to the insurance contract as above. ③ The Defendant received hospital treatment for up to 18 days on April 13, 2004 on the ground that it was difficult for the Defendant to enter into an insurance contract for a long period of up to 20 years on the ground that it was difficult for the Defendant to enter into an insurance contract for a long period of up to 20 years on the ground that the Defendant had been suffering from injury on the right pelle, 18 days on the ground that it exceeded 205, 10 days on the ground that the Defendant had entered into an insurance contract for a long period of up to 20 years on the ground that it was 10 days off 20 days on the 20-day 20 days off.

Therefore, since the instant insurance contract entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void, the Defendant is entitled to seek compensation from the Plaintiff for unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 2.58,00,000 and the Plaintiff.

From September 2, 2013 to December 17, 2013, the delivery date of the complaint in this case, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated by applying 5% per annum under the Civil Act and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Park Jong-ok

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.